Let’s not forget the smaller ■■■■■■■ too. The excellent 8.3 litre C series and that horrible, but extremely successful 5.9 B series.
kr79:
I’m guessing ego as the 14 litre ■■■■■■■ isn’t known for giving up the host after low mileage. Same as why does anyone by a 730 scania or 750 Volvo to use in the uk at 44 ton. Between limiters and distances involved in this country you will never use that extra power enough to do enough extra work to warrant the extra cost.
In this case we’re talking about a different world in a different place in a different time.At around 35 t over North American terrain and the speeds which they were averaging during the 1970’s the phrase pedal to the metal would have still applied just as much to a KTA powered wagon than to a 14 Litre powered one.It was then just a question of which one was going faster foot to the boards and which one could stand up to it the longest without something going wrong in a big way.It’s arguable as to wether anything more than the turbocharged 14 Litre option would have been worth using in Europe at 38t gross with the differences in average speeds and less demanding terrain.
Although the KTA option,if offered the Brit wagons,in derated form,probably would have provided a better productivety/efficiency/low streesed reliability compromise than the big V8 naturally aspirated products of an unmentionable European competitor from ze vaterland. 
kr79:
I bet you have gone week at the knees reading that spec.
Nope my comments on the Gardner topic,concerning my dream spec,in the Luton product,would still stand. 
Oh dear naturally aspirated mercs I used to drive one 3025 8 wheeler e reg last year of non turbo made. Good when you got it going but getting there was a drawn out affair.
Carryfast:
Although the KTA option,if offered the Brit wagons,in derated form,probably would have provided a better productivety/efficiency/low streesed reliability compromise than the big V8 naturally aspirated products of an unmentionable European competitor from ze vaterland.
This is worse than the stuff you deleted. 
Do you honestly think that any vehicle designer, British or otherwise, would consider a 19litre straight six a natural substitute for the 12 litre V8 Mercedes? At the time (the 1626 came to GB in 1975), every British assembler offered the NHC250. The ■■■■■■■ engineers must have been idiots to sell such an engine into that market, when a 50% bigger one would have been a “better…compromise.” Sarcasm- the lowest form of wit, but it has its uses.
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
Although the KTA option,if offered the Brit wagons,in derated form,probably would have provided a better productivety/efficiency/low streesed reliability compromise than the big V8 naturally aspirated products of an unmentionable European competitor from ze vaterland.This is worse than the stuff you deleted.
Do you honestly think that any vehicle designer, British or otherwise, would consider a 19litre straight six a natural substitute for the 12 litre V8 Mercedes? At the time (the 1626 came to GB in 1975), every British assembler offered the NHC250. The ■■■■■■■ engineers must have been idiots to sell such an engine into that market, when a 50% bigger one would have been a “better…compromise.” Sarcasm- the lowest form of wit, but it has its uses.
Think you missed the bit about the ‘combination’ of productivety (performance)/efficiency/and reliability.So you really think that almost 13 litres of naturally aspirated boat anchor,that produced 256 hp max at 2500 rpm 
,is going to be as fuel efficient and productive as something fitted with a derated KTA would have been at least on long haul Euro work.Here’s a clue fuel consumption was never the naturally aspirated Merc V8’s strong point nor was getting anywhere fast especially if there were a few hills in the way.Understatement has it’s uses.
However I did say that in most cases for euro work the 14 Litre ■■■■■■■ was probably up to the job at least in turbocharged form not naturally aspirated form which as I’ve said took most British customers too long to work out just like those German engineers. 
But hopefully the stasi will realise that it wasn’t me this time who actually raised the actual name of a different manufacturer to make a point that’s relevant to the subject of the topic.
Nobody said you can’t mention other manufacurers, just that this thread wasn’t benefitting from a drawn out discussion on Gardner v Detroit 
Comparisons between anything and ■■■■■■■ are fine, you can even mention Gardner or Detroit if you want
As you have a fondness for the Luton Lorries, how about a comparison between ■■■■■■■ and Detroit engined examples 
You probably have more knowledge on those than anyone else, how did the bigger two strokes compare to the E series ■■■■■■■ models, how did the V6s compare to the L10 ■■■■■■■ engines
kr79:
I’m guessing ego as the 14 litre ■■■■■■■ isn’t known for giving up the host after low mileage. Same as why does anyone by a 730 scania or 750 Volvo to use in the uk at 44 ton. Between limiters and distances involved in this country you will never use that extra power enough to do enough extra work to warrant the extra cost.
I remember reading years ago in a truck mag, that for tippers 10bhp/ton was recommended as the right blend of power and fuel economy. It might be coincidence, but that theory seems to have died out once the Euro emission regs appeared.
newmercman:
Nobody said you can’t mention other manufacurers, just that this thread wasn’t benefitting from a drawn out discussion on Gardner v DetroitComparisons between anything and ■■■■■■■ are fine, you can even mention Gardner or Detroit if you want
As you have a fondness for the Luton Lorries, how about a comparison between ■■■■■■■ and Detroit engined examples
You probably have more knowledge on those than anyone else, how did the bigger two strokes compare to the E series ■■■■■■■ models, how did the V6s compare to the L10 ■■■■■■■ engines
I’m not able to provide any first hand info on those differences nmm because my experience of the TM’s was all Detroit powered not ■■■■■■■ which shows the difference between the fire fighting vehicle sector of the world markets and uk haulage sector at the time.History shows that,unlike in many markets,■■■■■■■ was the preferred choice in the UK haulage environment,whereas in the North American and colonial haulage market sectors it was a much closer rivalry between the two for a much closer market share.
I think it’s obvious that the idea of putting the non turbo 6V71 and 8V71 into the TM in the domestic market,to run at max weights,was a big mistake (mostly not of GM’s making) which then just clouded any further possible acceptance of any future more fuel efficient turbocharged Detroit powered versions in the domestic market which by then was more or less dominated by ■■■■■■■ anyway in British produced trucks and,like the experience of those other uk manufacturers later,without ■■■■■■■■■■ of the domestic market,it’s all over.
From that point on the progression of Detroit ( compared to ■■■■■■■ ) as a credible force in the uk haulage market,was over.However it’s easy to get an idea of the type of the continuing competition between the two in those markets where they each both (rightly) had (probably still have) a continuing loyal customer base.
Saviem:
Evening all, good ■■■■■■■ stuff coming through! cav551, excellent post on the 220s, but the engine you refer to used by ■■■■■■■ in their marketing, was a 180, in an LV ERF, (was it F, 68 reg)? that was operated by Plants at Gnosall, Nr Stafford. Cracking engine those 180s, I always thought them more “driveable” than the 205, (but not the 220).I do not know if “my claim to fame” is truly such, but I always wondered if I was the only person in the UK to have run a KTA 18litre in a tractor unit? Back in 94 I imported a Marmon conventional, (the rare breed from Texas). Bl… ugly thing, … but wow was she impressive! KTA,@600hp, (and like lots of these show and go trucks came with the dyno sheets)! 15speed double overdrive, and a six speed spicer behind that! No, truly I could not change through every gear, who on earth specs transmissions like this, only does it for one purpose, to achieve a set of gears that provide the optimum performance for their needs, and the fact that you end up with a myriad of unusable ratios is purely incidental! Tandem SQHDs on newway air, 90in Double Eagle, odly she ran on aluminium 20in Budds,80%, and no caps. Painted in Misted Imron, (a fading green), so many gauges that you just got worried if a needle moved! But the heart, The KTA, what can one say, just excessive in every way, just the sight of it when you tipped the bonnet, the rumble, the whistle, gears, you do`nt need gears, she had come from an Owner operator from Oklahoma, via an old friend in Kansas city, and had been contracted to Bekins. Why on earth the man specified a KTA could only be ego, and lots of it! But what a wonderful machine, and what a fantastic engine, (despite having exceeded 1000000miles, as documented). And she still lives in Italy with the proud owner who purchased her from me!
[ZB], interesting point, and often overlooked, about the way manufacturers declared their engines power outputs. Apples and Pears comes to mind! Somewhere in a filing cabinet I have an excellent guide published by Unic, (Iveco), regarding the published ratings of all engines available in the French lorry market, like for like. A very useful document, (and very well thumbed)! One thing Iveco,as an organisation excell at, clear documentation, and product comparison. But they do`nt make inline 6cylinders like what ■■■■■■■ did! Cheerio for now.
Hi saviem,
My mate rob Wilson owns this mk2 contractor,seen here in Abergavenny steam fair may2012.rob’s mk2 is powered by an American k series 18 litre ■■■■■■■ diesel.as originally fitted by scammell.an interesting spec.on the marmon that you imported.
Regards Andrew.
Carryfast, you mention a loyal customer base in the colonies, which is true, but Detroit don’t sell ‘loose’ engines anymore, you want one of their powerplants, you buy a Freightliner or a Western Star, which are also owned by parent company Daimler AG, whereas ■■■■■■■ are available in everything, including Freightliners and Western Stars.
For ■■■■■■■ to be still on everyone’s list of suppliers is some achievment, especially when you consider Volvo, who have always used their own engines, for many years ■■■■■■■ engined Volvos outnumbered Volvo engined Volvos by a huge margin
To go back to your beloved Bedfords, the Detroit era didn’t last long, now you can’t say that it was because buyers were scared of the two strokes, because at that time the landscape was changing significantly, the days of naturally aspirated Gardners and the rest were coming to an end, Detroit two strokes were as radical as the ‘new’ breed of turbocharged engines from Volvo, Scania, Daf et all. Bedford were new to the heavy end of the market, the two strokes never had much of an impact, yet the ■■■■■■■ engined TM was as good as anything else out there, not just the British Built Lorries, but as good as the foreigners too, so what was the biggest factor Why were ■■■■■■■ so much more successful than Detroit
newmercman:
Carryfast, you mention a loyal customer base in the colonies, which is true, but Detroit don’t sell ‘loose’ engines anymore, you want one of their powerplants, you buy a Freightliner or a Western Star, which are also owned by parent company Daimler AG, whereas ■■■■■■■ are available in everything, including Freightliners and Western Stars.For ■■■■■■■ to be still on everyone’s list of suppliers is some achievment, especially when you consider Volvo, who have always used their own engines, for many years ■■■■■■■ engined Volvos outnumbered Volvo engined Volvos by a huge margin
To go back to your beloved Bedfords, the Detroit era didn’t last long, now you can’t say that it was because buyers were scared of the two strokes, because at that time the landscape was changing significantly, the days of naturally aspirated Gardners and the rest were coming to an end, Detroit two strokes were as radical as the ‘new’ breed of turbocharged engines from Volvo, Scania, Daf et all. Bedford were new to the heavy end of the market, the two strokes never had much of an impact, yet the ■■■■■■■ engined TM was as good as anything else out there, not just the British Built Lorries, but as good as the foreigners too, so what was the biggest factor
I sincerely hope you will not be expecting a sensible and coherant answer from CF,NMM,cause you have just shattered every fantasy that CF believes about DD’s !! Cheers Bewick.
newmercman:
Carryfast, you mention a loyal customer base in the colonies, which is true, but Detroit don’t sell ‘loose’ engines anymore, you want one of their powerplants, you buy a Freightliner or a Western Star, which are also owned by parent company Daimler AG, whereas ■■■■■■■ are available in everything, including Freightliners and Western Stars.For ■■■■■■■ to be still on everyone’s list of suppliers is some achievment, especially when you consider Volvo, who have always used their own engines, for many years ■■■■■■■ engined Volvos outnumbered Volvo engined Volvos by a huge margin
To go back to your beloved Bedfords, the Detroit era didn’t last long, now you can’t say that it was because buyers were scared of the two strokes, because at that time the landscape was changing significantly, the days of naturally aspirated Gardners and the rest were coming to an end, Detroit two strokes were as radical as the ‘new’ breed of turbocharged engines from Volvo, Scania, Daf et all. Bedford were new to the heavy end of the market, the two strokes never had much of an impact, yet the ■■■■■■■ engined TM was as good as anything else out there, not just the British Built Lorries, but as good as the foreigners too, so what was the biggest factor
As I’ve said it’s mainly the 1970’s/80’s which were the peak years for the older tech engines and which was the make or break time and turning point for the Detroit powered TM and I think that situation was mostly a British customer resistance thing nothing more.If that comparison was taken into a worldwide context,with the colonies ‘and’ the North American market added together and some other markets like the Middle East and the comparison probably looks a lot different.While at this time the two were independent engine suppliers to every manufacturer and assembling operation that wanted them.
The fact is,at that time,these two were probably the two main competitors in their respective markets,wherever they were sold together,with a loyal customer base built up over years.During that time I’d bet that it would have been difficult,if not impossible,to have changed the buying habits of their respective customer base in which case long term Detroit customers stayed long term Detroit customers and vice versa.
While in the case of emergency vehicles the choice was simpler because nothing else could provide the type of reliable torque/horsepower outputs for their size which would have ticked at least two boxes required in the haulage sector reliability and productivety.The fuel efficiency issue was more open to question but the fact is no one in the haulage industry,wherever it is in the world,likes throwing money away if they don’t need to and if there’s a more fuel efficient competitor out there assuming that it’s a like with like comparison on engine size and specific power/torque outputs.In which case it’s obvious that the old GM screamers and therefore the company itself would’nt have lasted past the 1950’s.Instead of which they decided to put one of less than 12 litres capacity in a 100 + tonner heavy haulage wagon for the military in the 21’st century not the ■■■■■■■ KTA.
However just to prove that it was all about the erratic nature of the British market the fact is Mercs did find some British buyers for those gutless thirsty naturally aspirated V8’s of theirs when those customers could have bought something made here with a turbocharged ■■■■■■■ in it.
Carryfast:
Think you missed the bit about the ‘combination’ of productivety (performance)/efficiency/and reliability.
I did miss it.You never mentioned it.
back in the late eightie,s i drove a E series ERF with a E320 and twin splitter for onward transport,it was one of a trio they got and this motor served me well it broke down in leeds but that was down to the batteries,the truck was double manned doing 1.030 km,s a day six days a week.the truck was serviced every three week and this motor never needed oil put in.It,s performance was unbeliveable it would romp over the A66 and hardly see the climb over stain more,but the other two could not touch mine.It was pleasure to drive and the speed was there as i found out at threlkeld one mornig when a nice policeman stopped me and asked for the tacho chart and when he saw 125kph he said how bloody fast was that,then he kindly offered me a fixed penalty for doing 60 in a 40 as he could not catch me when i passed him. this was the best truck i ever had and if i got the chance to drive it again would jump at it
newmercman:
Why were ■■■■■■■ so much more successful than Detroit
They don’t give you a headache after driving the thing for 10 minutes would be good enough reason for getting a ■■■■■■■■
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
Think you missed the bit about the ‘combination’ of productivety (performance)/efficiency/and reliability.I did miss it.You never mentioned it.
kr79:
newmercman:
Why were ■■■■■■■ so much more successful than DetroitThey don’t give you a headache after driving the thing for 10 minutes would be good enough reason for getting a ■■■■■■■■
Surprisingly the TM cab was well insulated from noise levels and was as quiet,if not quieter,to drive as the Rolls powered Foden and both of those weren’t much different to the DAF 2800.In all of those engine noise was just sort of distant rumble under the cab and certainly not enough to keep anyone awake if they were a bit knackered.The old ■■■■■■■ powered Atki gritters were a different matter though.
This NH220 plainly isn’t insulated against in cab noise!
pete 359:
Saviem:
Evening all, good ■■■■■■■ stuff coming through! cav551, excellent post on the 220s, but the engine you refer to used by ■■■■■■■ in their marketing, was a 180, in an LV ERF, (was it F, 68 reg)? that was operated by Plants at Gnosall, Nr Stafford. Cracking engine those 180s, I always thought them more “driveable” than the 205, (but not the 220).I do not know if “my claim to fame” is truly such, but I always wondered if I was the only person in the UK to have run a KTA 18litre in a tractor unit? Back in 94 I imported a Marmon conventional, (the rare breed from Texas). Bl… ugly thing, … but wow was she impressive! KTA,@600hp, (and like lots of these show and go trucks came with the dyno sheets)! 15speed double overdrive, and a six speed spicer behind that! No, truly I could not change through every gear, who on earth specs transmissions like this, only does it for one purpose, to achieve a set of gears that provide the optimum performance for their needs, and the fact that you end up with a myriad of unusable ratios is purely incidental! Tandem SQHDs on newway air, 90in Double Eagle, odly she ran on aluminium 20in Budds,80%, and no caps. Painted in Misted Imron, (a fading green), so many gauges that you just got worried if a needle moved! But the heart, The KTA, what can one say, just excessive in every way, just the sight of it when you tipped the bonnet, the rumble, the whistle, gears, you do`nt need gears, she had come from an Owner operator from Oklahoma, via an old friend in Kansas city, and had been contracted to Bekins. Why on earth the man specified a KTA could only be ego, and lots of it! But what a wonderful machine, and what a fantastic engine, (despite having exceeded 1000000miles, as documented). And she still lives in Italy with the proud owner who purchased her from me!
[ZB], interesting point, and often overlooked, about the way manufacturers declared their engines power outputs. Apples and Pears comes to mind! Somewhere in a filing cabinet I have an excellent guide published by Unic, (Iveco), regarding the published ratings of all engines available in the French lorry market, like for like. A very useful document, (and very well thumbed)! One thing Iveco,as an organisation excell at, clear documentation, and product comparison. But they do`nt make inline 6cylinders like what ■■■■■■■ did! Cheerio for now.
Hi saviem,
My mate rob Wilson owns this mk2 contractor,seen here in Abergavenny steam fair may2012.rob’s mk2 is powered by an American k series 18 litre ■■■■■■■ diesel.as originally fitted by scammell.an interesting spec.on the marmon that you imported.
Regards Andrew.
Evening all, hello Andrew, I did not know that Scammel fitted the K series a a straight option. That Contractor is one hell of a motor to own, I presume she has a semi auto box? Lucky man!
A lot of the later French Willeme TGs, as built by Perez et Raimond, the French Detroit importer, later had the Detroits taken out, and replaced by KTs. One such, still operated and owned by Phillipe Brame, as either a ballast locomotive, or as a 120tonne 5th wheel tractor, is powered by a KTA, with a Clark auto box. Transports Zucconi had a KTA regularly working at 300tonnes, (6x4), and Transports Scalex re engined an original Willeme TG Detroit with a KTA, 8x8 at 700tonnes plus!! Some lorries! "Our " Berliet TBO, was physically similar size to the Contractor, but never, ever the match of Louis Willemes designs!! (even when retro fitted with a KTA, surely the worlds most favoured retro fit "big hitter " engine of its time),
Yes,that Marmon was an interesting, (if little confusing), spec. Most of the US iron that I imported was ■■■■■■■ powered, (I always felt “safe” with Mr ■■■■■■■■■■ but I did bring in some CATV8s, and (a big mistake… some “green leakers”), incredible noise,and with Allison Autos, so fast as to be unbelievable), but hard to sell!!
The only "double boxes " that I imported were the Marmon, two W900s, and a Pete 362, withthe longest wheelbase I have ever seen, covered by an enormous “Naughhyde” filled double Eagle, ( a masterclass in how to waste space)!! Most were RTOO. or RTO 13, or 15speed, and the second box was universaly a Spicer 6speed. Now the 362, (more blind spots than any other vehicle ever), had a 10speed Spicer, with a 6speed Spicer behind, and was actually the nicest one to drive of the lot!!! She found a home in sunny Spain, (and what an enjoyable “delivery drive” that was)!!
But you know when we look back, the biggest break through for ■■■■■■■ was the “Big Cam E290”, hi torque rise 14litre. But what consternation that engine caused in the UK market. It would not fit most chassis! Foden, ERF, had to totally redesign their front axle to take the physically larger, (heavier), engine. The only UK assembler that could accomodate the E290, was Seddon Atkinson.
But the physical dimensions were not the only problem…no one had an axle “tall enough” to accomodate 60mph @1700rpm!! Only the US manufacturers!!!( as an aside , was this the catalyst that turned Foden towards propriotory components, axles, gearboxes, et al)■■ Exactly the same situation pertained with clutches, and their torque capacity!! Could it be said that the E290 was the catalyst for US inspired drivelines in UK assembled, (manufactured) lorries■■? A point to ponder upon, and I shall ponder with the aid of several large glasses of Bollinger, Bon Nuit, mes braves, Cheerio for now.